[-] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 4 points 16 hours ago

The article you posted is from 2023 and PERA was basically dropped. However, this article talks about PREVAIL, which would prevent patents from being challenged except by the people who were sued by the patent-holder, and it’s still relevant.

[-] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 2 points 2 days ago
  • Assembled: 1200 USD
  • Kit: 950 USD
[-] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 1 points 5 days ago

The rules text says it creates an area of darkness, and with your interpretation, it doesn’t, which means your interpretation is wrong. Yes, the ability could be written more clearly, but the logic for a reasonable way for it to function follows pretty cleanly. Your interpretation is not RAW or RAI.

There’s a reply on RPG StackExchange that covers a similar line of logic to what I wrote above.

Remember that Fifth Edition D&D is intentionally not written with the same exacting precision as games like M:tG. The game doesn’t have an explicit definition of magical darkness, but it’s pretty clear that the intent is for magical to trump mundane (when it comes to sources of light and darkness). Even the Specific Beats General section says that most of the exceptions to general rules are due to magic.

[-] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 44 points 1 month ago

Why? Open source doesn’t mean “cheap” or “at cost.”

[-] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 61 points 4 months ago

Do you honestly think that’s because all the older toys got banned and not largely because toy companies sell whatever makes them the most money?

[-] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 48 points 4 months ago

It’s largely the first one, at least according to The Man Who Killed Google Search.

See also the Hackernews discussion and this follow-up article by the same author (with links to an article with Google’s response, summaries of other discussions on the topic, etc.)

[-] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 64 points 5 months ago

They aren’t. From a comment on https://www.reddit.com/r/ublock/comments/32mos6/ublock_vs_ublock_origin/ by u/tehdang:

For people who have stumbled into this thread while googling "ublock vs origin". Take a look at this link:

http://tuxdiary.com/2015/06/14/ublock-origin/

"Chris AlJoudi [current owner of uBlock] is under fire on Reddit due to several actions in recent past:

  • In a Wikipedia edit for uBlock, Chris removed all credits to Raymond [Hill, original author and owner of uBlock Origin] and added his name without any mention of the original author’s contribution.
  • Chris pledged a donation with overblown details on expenses like $25 per week for web hosting.
  • The activities of Chris since he took over the project are more business and advertisement oriented than development driven."

So I would recommend that you go with uBlock Origin and not uBlock. I hope this helps!

Edit: Also got this bit of information from here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/chrome/comments/32ory7/ublock_is_back_under_a_new_name/

TL;DR:

  • gorhill [Raymond Hill] got tired of dozens of "my facebook isnt working plz help" issues.
  • he handed the repository to chrismatic [Chris Aljioudi] while maintaining control of the extension in the Chrome webstore (by forking chrismatic's version back to himself).
  • chrismatic promptly added donate buttons and a "made with love by Chris" note.
  • gorhill took exception to this and asked chrismatic to change the name so people didn't confuse uBlock (the original, now called uBlock Origin) and uBlock (chrismatic's version).
  • Google took down gorhill's extension. Apparently this was because of the naming issue (since technically chrismatic has control of the repo).
  • gorhill renamed and rebranded his version of ublock to uBlock Origin.
[-] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 46 points 6 months ago

It’s not changing the default behavior, so it still has it.

Per the article, they’re introducing a new opt-in feature that a woman, enbie, or person looking for same-gender matches can set up - basically a prompt that their matches can reply to.

I think Bumble also used to prevent you from sending multiple messages before getting a reply, but maybe that was a different app... If they still do that in combination with this feature, then I could see this feature continuing to accomplish their mission of empowering women in online dating.

[-] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 46 points 6 months ago

Terrible article. Even worse advice.

On iOS at least, if you’re concerned about police breaking into your phone, you should be using a high entropy password, not a numeric PIN, and biometric auth is the best way to keep your convenience (and sanity) intact without compromising your security. This is because there is software that can break into a locked phone (even one that has biometrics disabled) by brute forcing the PIN, bypassing the 10 attempts limit if set, as well as not triggering iOS’s brute force protections, like forcing delays between attempts. If your password is sufficiently complex, then you’re more likely to be safe against such an attack.

I suspect the same is true on Android.

Such a search is supposed to require a warrant, but the tool itself doesn’t check for it, so you have to trust the individual LEOs in question to follow the law. And given that any 6 digit PIN can be brute forced in under 11 hours (40 ms per entry), this means that if you were arrested (even for a spurious charge) and held overnight, they could search your phone without you knowing.

With a password that has the same entropy as 10 random digits, assuming no further vulnerabilities allowing them to speed up the process, it could take up to 12 and a half years to brute force it. Make it alphanumeric (and still random) and it’s millions of years - infeasible within our lifetime - it’s basically a question of whether another vulnerability is already known or is discovered that enables bypassing the password entirely / much faster rates of entry.

If you’re in a situation where you expect to interact with law enforcement, then disable biometrics. Practice ahead of time to make sure you know how to do it on your phone.

[-] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 62 points 7 months ago

For anyone who didn’t click into the original post and whose client didn’t include its text, here are the instructions for opting out:

Opt-out. You can decline this agreement to arbitrate by emailing an opt-out notice to arbitration-opt-out@discord.com within 30 days of April 15, 2024 or when you first register your Discord account, whichever is later; otherwise, you shall be bound to arbitrate disputes in accordance with the terms of these paragraphs. If you opt out of these arbitration provisions, Discord also will not be bound by them.

Note that the forced arbitration clause applies only to Discord users in the US. The class action waiver appears to apply regardless.

This is also not a new addition to their TOS, but it does appear to require opting out again even if you already did, and to grant an additional opt out opportunity if you didn’t.

35
submitted 10 months ago by hedgehog@ttrpg.network to c/gaming@lemmy.ml

The video teaser yesterday about this was already DMCAed by Nintendo, so I don’t think this video will be up long.

[-] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 133 points 11 months ago

Do you not think it’s relevant to point out that:

  • Only 3.7% of the protests involved vandalism or property damage
  • Only 2.3% of the protests involved any sort of violence (excluding vandalism or property damage)
  • Much of the violence was directed against the BLM protesters
  • Much of the violence was begun or escalated by police (who are supposed to be trained to de-escalate)
  • Much of the property damage and property damage was not linked to protesters

If 5% of the people involved at violent BLM protests were violent and if the numbers above reflected only protester initiated violence, then that would mean roughly 0.12% of BLM protesters (or 1 in a thousand) were violent. But since, as we know, most of the violence was directed against them, that number is probably more like 0.05%, or 5 in 10,000. Obviously that number would be much worse for the actual instigators of most of the violence (police and far-right Trump supporters).

Main source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/10/16/this-summers-black-lives-matter-protesters-were-overwhelming-peaceful-our-research-finds/

Also weird that you say “like 30 people” died when it was more like 10:

  • 8 BLM protesters
  • 1 far-right, pro-Trump protester, who was shot by a self-identified anti-fascist protester who said he had been acting in self-defense
  • the above anti-fascist protester, who was shot by police

Yes, there were like 25 deaths related to political unrest in 2020, but most of those were not at BLM protests. Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-killed-protests-political-unrest-acled

But hey, keep telling yourself that an active, intentionally orchestrated attempt by Trump and his supporters to violently overturn the results of our Presidential election was “basically the same thing lol” as a bunch of people who were protesting police violence and racism.

[-] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 79 points 1 year ago

the next-generation Switch might still be able to hold its own in terms of graphics performance with Sony’s PlayStation 5 and Microsoft’s Xbox Series X|S in some optimized titles.

I’ll believe that when I see it.

view more: next ›

hedgehog

joined 1 year ago